According to a new German study, electric cars have “significantly higher CO2 emissions than diesel cars”, and especially the Tesla Model 3 “performs particularly poorly” as it emits over 150 grams of CO2 for each kilometer it travels!

Up to 28% more CO2!

According to a study led by Christoph Buchal of the University of Cologne released by the Ifo Institute in Munich, when one takes into account Germany’s current energy mix — where the share of coal and gas still remains considerable — and the amount of energy used for electric car battery production, CO2 emissions by electric cars are higher than comparable diesel powered cars.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I laughed. I have little doubt the report is true. EVs in a hydro powered grid - ie Norway - might reduce emissions, but in a coal powered grid they would make things worse. Come to think of it, there have been Australian reports pointing this out. But the growing EV sect (a part of the global warming religion) won't deny this as opposed to merely ignore it..

Expect screams to the contrary, foaming at the mouth, insults, denials, and general brickbats from the Mainstream Media, and cries of ZOMG heresy from the Holy and Infallible Church of Global Warming.﻿

Ormaybe they will call the Germans who made the study ... literally Nazis (that would amuse me endlessly).

According to a new German study, electric cars have “significantly higher CO2 emissions than diesel cars”, and especially the Tesla Model 3 “performs particularly poorly” as it emits over 150 grams of CO2 for each kilometer it travels!

Up to 28% more CO2!

According to a study led by Christoph Buchal of the University of Cologne released by the Ifo Institute in Munich, when one takes into account Germany’s current energy mix — where the share of coal and gas still remains considerable — and the amount of energy used for electric car battery production, CO2 emissions by electric cars are higher than comparable diesel powered cars.

Citing the results of the study, the Stuttgarter Zeitung writes that when the production of the batteries is accounted for, an e-car “burdens the climate 11 – 28% more than a diesel car”.

...

All of this is in the present tense. "...present energy mix" is continually changing. I don't see much thought being given to the relative longevity of electric cars, or the pluses and minuses of recycling car batteries. If electric cars were recharged using the same power generation mix we have today in 50 years, we'd be in real trouble. Such a prediction is obviously silly.

"Expect screams to the contrary, foaming at the mouth, insults, denials, and general brickbats from the Mainstream Media,..." certainly exposes the prejudices anyone that uses that kind of language. Referencing 'Mainstream Media' in such a context is a bit strange - people in 'Mainstream Media' are either scientific illiterates or experienced enough with public perception to know not to lecture people on things they don't want to hear. The people that pay attention to this stuff read real books and know how to do the physics and chemistry math.

The world is full of 'experts' - some with high powered credentials and others with years of experience working in some obscure discipline. Where does 'Mainstream media' get their 'expert' commentators? The university down the street? Whoever they can think of that is an authority figure? Whoever is photogenic enough to attract viewers? Some 'experts' write their own books. Are these books the 'mainstream media' we're talking about?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

All of this is in the present tense. "...present energy mix" is continually changing. I don't see much thought being given to the relative longevity of electric cars, or the pluses and minuses of recycling car batteries. If electric cars were recharged using the same power generation mix we have today in 50 years, we'd be in real trouble. Such a prediction is obviously silly.

Meredith - sure we're talking about present energy mix. The problem is that energy mix is not likely to change very much for the foreseeable future. There has been much talk about replacing coal and gas but very little actual change, despite some of the supposedly impressive statistics quoted. The only real result of the adoption of renewables to date has been to make the grids more unreliable in certain places. To then load a bunch of recharging electric cars onto this mess is asking for more trouble. The battery replacement issue is another problem, I agree. The mainstream media - the concept is clear despite your doubts on the issue - have been unashamed cheer leaders for EVs, completely ignoring all the major problems. Rather than cast doubts on this my suggestion would be to simply accept it as the reality of the media environment and move on.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There will be more EV’s in landfills in 10-20 years than used condoms and toilet paper. The technology is just not sustainable with limited resources for batteries and their disposal, and the inefficiencies of dead weight loss and charging times, not to mention when they go off and self destruct in a ball of flames...!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Germans dropped nuclear power back in the 90’s as a part of the backlash from ecological disasters like the Brent Spar oil platform. Back then the plan was to have zero nuclear plants in twenty years. Not sure if they made their target, but if so, the unintended consequence was a dirty power grid just when support for EV’s began to take off.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I can certainly believe according to the second law of thermodynamics that whenever energy is transferred their is a loss of energy from a system and because so far the source or main source of eletricity is burninjg fossi fuels that you will lose most of the energy in a gallon of gas by turning it into electricity even before you start your electric vehicle.Also we need to mine lithium from somewhere or mine some other material to replce it and that requires burning fossil fuels as well as the impacts and geopolitics of mining.

On the other hand your dogmatic stance that there is no possible effect or connection between the uindeniable increase in global warming in recent decades to burning fossil fuels and undeniable increase in atmospheric CO2 strikes me as irrational as well.Do you deny plastic in the oceans and most likely in your own body tissues as well ? Yes the increase in over all global warming in recent years may have another cause than CO2 from burning fossil fuels but no one has provided a good alternative theory so far and the oceans themselves have absorbed the CO2 of a fair amount of the fossil fuels we have burned since the coming of the industrial era just as it has 'absorbed' a fair amount of the plastic we have created in recent decades but at what cost ? I believe some of that CO2 absorbed by the oceans has also begun to effect the ph of the oceans.Do you deny that as well ?'

.

Whencarbon dioxidedissolves in seawater, the water becomes more acidic and theocean's pH(a measure of how acidic or basic theoceanis) drops. Even though theoceanis immense, enoughcarbon dioxidecan have a major impact.Apr 30, 2018

Industrialism.....

Industrialism...

by Tony Ryals

It started out in England,
On a coal seam that seemed to have no end,
And had repercussions neither Adam
Smith nor Carl Marx could comprehend,
And while we fought over the delusions
of communism and capitalism - it grew,
It was industrialism that always united the two,
Now we pump oil from the earth,
And mine fossil fertilizer to give us birth,
As Bob Dylan said, "None of them along the line
know what any of it's worth",
Fossil carbon is burned, and metal is turned,
just as in England in the 18th century,
We continue with our entropy,

This basic technology,
Is still our philosophy,
Not communism or capitalism,
This technology so noble,
Even built Chernobyl,
Fossil carbon is burned,
And metal is turned,
This addiction now to oil,
Takes us more to foreign soil,
This world industrialism,
Is a new colonialism,
That can only lead to schism,
Strategic minerals outside our boundaries,
Lead o geopohtical quandaries,
Yet we go on squandering

What we should be monitoring,
Fossil carbon is burned and metal is turned,
Giving more power to the industrialists- we call it free trade,
Only magnifies mistakes we've already made,
China now rips coal from the ground as fast as it can;
Mexico pumps oil to ship to Japan,
The rest of Asia and South America have the same plan,
It ain't communism or capitalism - its industrialism,
It builds freeways for our cars,
And computers for our wars,
General Eisenhower's military industrial complex,
Remains our Frankenstein - our Tyrannosaurus Rex,
Those who would say we're in a post industrial society,
Should be tested for sobriety,
Or at least show a little more piety,
To their big, unstable brother - industrialism,

Edited April 23 by Tony Ryals

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I can certainly believe according to the second law of thermodynamics that whenever energy is transfered their is a loss of energy from a system and because so far the source of main source of eletricity is burninjg fossi fuels that you will loose most of the energy in a gallon of gas by turning it into electricity even before you start your electric vehicle.

On the other hand your dogmatic belief that there is no effect or connection between the uindeniable increase in global warming in recent decades to burning fossil fuels strikes me as irrational as well.Do you deny plastic in the oceans and most likely in your own body tissues as well ? Yes te increase in over of global warming in recent years may have another cause than CO2 from burning fossil fuels but no one has provided a good alternative theory so far and the oceans themselves have absorbed the CO2 of a fair amount of tyhe fossil fuels we have burned since the coming of the industrial era just as it has 'absorbed' a fair amount of the pastic we have created in recent decades but at what cost ? I believe some of that CO2 absorbed by the oceans has also begun to effect the ph of the oceans.Do deny that as well ?'

Whencarbon dioxidedissolves in seawater, the water becomes more acidic and theocean's pH(a measure of how acidic or basic theoceanis) drops. Even though theoceanis immense, enoughcarbon dioxidecan have a major impact.Apr 30, 2018

Ocean can absorb 100% of every carbon atom on the planet and not go acidic. PH 8.2 currently. The ocean, is BASIC and the lying scum at the Smithsonian know it just as anyone else does who is not a brain dead zombie. You might want to open your eyes to all those immense chalk limestone cliffs. Calcium Carbonate, most of which was produced when CO2 levels were a magnitude greater than today and no, the ocean was not acidic then either. Lobster and Crab will explode in growth. Oysters? Up to a point and then fall off. Of course how much Iron will in the water is another major contributor to CO2 sequestration, but no one wishes to bring this into the forefront. Multidiscipline discussions are 100% forbidden by the Climate religion folks. So, most of their experiments regarding CO2 increase is without a corresponding increase in Calcium or other substances which will be released into the water. Just like their moronic coral growth numbers... they assume perfect constants when we know for a fact that when the Calcium increases, coral LOVE it and their ONLY limitation to growth rate and survival in higher CO2 environments is availability of Calcium. Pssst... what happens when RAIN in a higher CO2 environment hits calcium bearing rocks... hrmmmmm.....

1

1

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

A problem with such studies is that they look at emissions for producing batteries, in that case one needs to look at CO2 emissions for producing, refining, distributing the diesel, as well as the emissions from the tail pipe of the car. Using the average World CO2 emissions per kWh of electricity produced (from BP statistical review), a Tesla Model 3 would create 117 grams of CO2 emissions per mile from the electricity used (assuming we take the average emissions from all electricity produced in the World in 2017). If we assume an average diesel car gets 35 miles per gallon, emissions would be about 267 grams of CO2 per mile about 2.3 times higher than the Tesla Model 3.

Not all electricity is produced by coal fired power plant, there is lots of natural gas, hydro, nuclear, wind, solar and geothermal production of electricity as well.

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Ocean can absorb 100% of every carbon atom on the planet and not go acidic. PH 8.2 currently. The ocean, is BASIC and the lying scum at the Smithsonian know it just as anyone else does who is not a brain dead zombie. You might want to open your eyes to all those immense chalk limestone cliffs. Calcium Carbonate, most of which was produced when CO2 levels were a magnitude greater than today and no, the ocean was not acidic then either. Lobster and Crab will explode in growth. Oysters? Up to a point and then fall off. Of course how much Iron will in the water is another major contributor to CO2 sequestration, but no one wishes to bring this into the forefront. Multidiscipline discussions are 100% forbidden by the Climate religion folks. So, most of their experiments regarding CO2 increase is without a corresponding increase in Calcium or other substances which will be released into the water. Just like their moronic coral growth numbers... they assume perfect constants when we know for a fact that when the Calcium increases, coral LOVE it and their ONLY limitation to growth rate and survival in higher CO2 environments is availability of Calcium. Pssst... what happens when RAIN in a higher CO2 environment hits calcium bearing rocks... hrmmmmm.....

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There will be more EV’s in landfills in 10-20 years than used condoms and toilet paper. The technology is just not sustainable with limited resources for batteries and their disposal, and the inefficiencies of dead weight loss and charging times, not to mention when they go off and self destruct in a ball of flames...!

According to a new German study, electric cars have “significantly higher CO2 emissions than diesel cars”, and especially the Tesla Model 3 “performs particularly poorly” as it emits over 150 grams of CO2 for each kilometer it travels!

Up to 28% more CO2!

According to a study led by Christoph Buchal of the University of Cologne released by the Ifo Institute in Munich, when one takes into account Germany’s current energy mix — where the share of coal and gas still remains considerable — and the amount of energy used for electric car battery production, CO2 emissions by electric cars are higher than comparable diesel powered cars.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There will be more EV’s in landfills in 10-20 years than used condoms and toilet paper. The technology is just not sustainable with limited resources for batteries and their disposal, and the inefficiencies of dead weight loss and charging times, not to mention when they go off and self destruct in a ball of flames...!

Those batteries will not be in landfills but have decades of life beyond motorised transport as stationary storage at either a utility level or individually / smaller quantities in homes and small businesses.

This is already being rolled out by car manufacturers, utilities and small enterprises.

YOu never read it did you? YOu just posted a link backing up my statement... 5000 gigatons 300 yrs... Thanks man! You are Great!

Of course they added T additions but not Wind velocity additions that go with the T additions. They KNOW this is the DOMINANT driving factor as the amount of CO2 sequestration goes by the 4th power of wind speed, but hey, why bother with science...

Appears your so called "scientists" aren't scientists at all. Just hacks who ignore the #1 biggest contributor to CO2 ocean sequestration. Smooth.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The technology is just not sustainable with limited resources for batteries and their disposal, and the inefficiencies of dead weight loss and charging times, not to

Recycling of the materials will not be a problem. Recycling is all about a quantity issue. This was solved long ago by placing CORE charges on replacement parts be it batteries, alternators, starters, etc etc etc.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I am aware that phosphates as well as iron can go out of soution in the ocean and limit phytoplankton growth in the oceans but truly you are trying to ignore the larger issues I am raising.CO2 has in fact affected aquaculture in some areas such as the U.S. Pacific Northwest to the extent that aquaculturists have had to re alkaliize their cean water for their salmon.Hey but then we could debate aquaculture and its environmental imàcts as well........And I could and am cynical about Smithsonian as well as National Geographic and use other sources and in fact this below has been written about recently by and ib other sources but thet are presenting the researchers who recently tested for microplastics in the air in what should be one of the most pristine parts of estern Europe and you make next rave about the nutritinal benefits of breathing plastic but this is indeed another petroleum product in the atmosphere that I think is terrible.I'm o glad I don't have kids.......But you can poke fun at these researchers with relish,after all they are French.....

And of course we are so much 'smarter than the French..Fox News has already told us that........Not to mention those Germans.Only Israelis are smarter than us.,ha,ha....

IN WHAT LOOKSlike a pristine, remote mountain region, tiny pieces of plastic pollution were found raining down from the sky—raising questions about the global extent of plastic pollution—a first-of-its-kind study has found.

Scientists recorded a daily rate of 365 microplastic particles per square meter falling from the sky in the Pyrenees Mountains in southern France.

“It was incredible how much microplastic was being deposited,” saidDeonie Allen, a researcher at EcoLab in the School of Agricultural and Life Sciences in Toulouse, France. There were no obvious sources for the microplastics within 60 miles (100 kilometers), said Allen, the lead author of the study published Monday inNature Geoscience..............

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I rise my hand. In Switzerland the rate of the dead batteries collected and recycled is now at 70% (rising from 20% in 1990) .

A funny Superhero character called Battery Man has been created to promote battery recycling.

That's good news! Although the Battery Man caped superhero guy strikes me as .... odd. In an amusing sort of way. But that's supposed to be the idea, apparently. Nacho Libre!

Over here in Malaysia, there is no designated facility or area that I am aware of to recycle batteries of any kind. Into the garbage they go, and then end up either in a landfill or incinerator. I've given up trying to recycle batteries here, as nobody here seems to know what to do with their dead batteries except dustbin them.

According to a new German study, electric cars have “significantly higher CO2 emissions than diesel cars”, and especially the Tesla Model 3 “performs particularly poorly” as it emits over 150 grams of CO2 for each kilometer it travels!

Up to 28% more CO2!

According to a study led by Christoph Buchal of the University of Cologne released by the Ifo Institute in Munich, when one takes into account Germany’s current energy mix — where the share of coal and gas still remains considerable — and the amount of energy used for electric car battery production, CO2 emissions by electric cars are higher than comparable diesel powered cars.